Suppr超能文献

使用不同口内扫描仪流模式评估成像准确性:一项研究。

Assessment of Imaging Accuracy Using Different Intraoral Scanner Streaming Modes: An Study.

作者信息

Mubarak Ahmed Khalaf Ahmed, Shalaby Mohammed Moustafa, Bakry Ahmed Mohammed

机构信息

Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Minia University, Minia, Egypt, Phone: +20 1009398693, e-mail:

Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Minia University, Minia, Egypt.

出版信息

J Contemp Dent Pract. 2025 Apr 1;26(4):397-402. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3863.

Abstract

AIM

This study evaluated the accuracy of two intraoral scanners with different streaming modes (CEREC Omnicam, Dentsply-Sirona, USA; video mode) and (Shining 3D, Aoralscan, China; image mode).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three sets of acrylic maxillary typodont were uniformly reduced with known axial wall taper of 10°, 15° and 20°, respectively, using a computer numerical control (CNC) milling machine. Then, abutments were randomly divided into 3 groups: (1) Single abutments; (2) successive abutments; (3) and simple bridge-like abutments. Such abutments were scanned with three scanners: (1) Desktop scanner (InEos X5) that serve as a reference; (2) experimental intraoral scanners (CEREC Omnicam and Shining 3D). The analysis of these scans has been carried out using Geomagic Control X software to assess both IOSs trueness and precision. Each experimental model (CEREC Omnicam and Shining 3D) was scanned three times for precision determination. Descriptive analysis has been carried out by one-way ANOVA and independent -test to ascertain any significant difference between the two comparing scanners.

RESULTS

Regarding trueness, CEREC Omnicam has significantly better trueness (0.0554 ± 0.0111 mm) than Shining 3D IOS (0.0737 ± 0.0380 mm). Meanwhile, the variance in axial wall taper demonstrated little significant variation in all groups (single, successive, and bridge-like). The significant difference is associated with shallow axial wall taper (10° taper). On the contrary, both 15° and 20° axial wall taper/total occlusal convergence (TOC) revealed no significant difference. However, no significance was revealed in regard to precision.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this study, the accuracy of the tested video and image streaming mode scanners is within the clinically acceptable range regarding different prosthetic scenarios, as well as different preparation convergences.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides valuable insights into intraoral scanners' accuracy regarding their different streaming modes, various prosthetic scenarios, and total occlusal convergence (TOC) as well. How to cite this article: Mubarak AKA, Shalaby MM, Bakry AM. Assessment of Imaging Accuracy Using Different Intraoral Scanner Streaming Modes: An Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(4):397-402.

摘要

目的

本研究评估了两种具有不同流模式的口内扫描仪的准确性(CEREC Omnicam,登士柏西诺德,美国;视频模式)以及(先临三维,Aoralscan,中国;图像模式)。

材料与方法

使用计算机数控(CNC)铣床,将三组丙烯酸上颌牙模型分别均匀磨除,使其轴向壁锥度分别为已知的10°、15°和20°。然后,基台被随机分为3组:(1)单个基台;(2)连续基台;(3)简单桥状基台。这些基台用三台扫描仪进行扫描:(1)台式扫描仪(InEos X5)作为参考;(2)实验性口内扫描仪(CEREC Omnicam和先临三维)。使用Geomagic Control X软件对这些扫描进行分析,以评估两种口内扫描仪的准确性和精度。每个实验模型(CEREC Omnicam和先临三维)扫描三次以确定精度。通过单因素方差分析和独立样本t检验进行描述性分析,以确定两台比较扫描仪之间是否存在任何显著差异。

结果

关于准确性,CEREC Omnicam的准确性(0.0554±‍0.0111毫米)明显优于先临三维口内扫描仪(0.0737±‍0.0380毫米)。同时,轴向壁锥度的差异在所有组(单个、连续和桥状)中显示出几乎没有显著变化。显著差异与浅轴向壁锥度(10°锥度)有关。相反,15°和20°的轴向壁锥度/总咬合聚合度(TOC)均未显示出显著差异。然而,在精度方面未发现显著差异。

结论

在本研究的局限性内

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验